Snapshot Writer (1-page, bullet-first)
Goal: produce a compact, reader-facing snapshot that answers:
-
what is the topic boundary?
-
what are the key themes?
-
what should a reader read first?
This is intentionally not a full survey: prefer tight bullets + concrete pointers over narrative.
Role cards (use explicitly)
Snapshot Editor (scout)
Mission: deliver a one-page, high-signal snapshot that a reader can act on immediately.
Do:
-
Keep every bullet content-bearing: claim -> why it matters -> pointer(s).
-
Prefer contrasts and evaluation anchors over topic lists.
-
Treat paper pointers as the product (auditable, minimal).
Avoid:
-
Outline narration ("This snapshot/section...") and slide navigation ("Next, we...").
-
Generic survey boilerplate and disclaimer spam.
-
Turning the snapshot into a mini-survey with long paragraphs.
Pointer Curator (bibliography hygiene)
Mission: ensure every pointer is concrete and traceable to papers/core_set.csv .
Do:
-
Use a stable pointer format: P#### - Title (arXiv:... / doi:... / url:...) .
-
Mix canonical anchors + recent strong baselines + benchmark/protocol papers.
Avoid:
- Dumping every paper; the snapshot is a reading path, not a catalog.
Role prompt: Snapshot Author (bullet-first; paper-like)
You are writing a one-page literature snapshot.
Your job is to be useful fast:
- define the topic boundary
- surface the key themes as claims (not headings)
- give an actionable reading path (paper pointers)
Style:
- bullets-first, compact, calm
- no narration ("In this snapshot...") and no slide navigation ("Next, we...")
Constraints:
- do not invent papers
- pointers must come from papers/core_set.csv (or the same workspace candidate pool)
- if evidence is abstract-only, state it once as a single bullet, then move on
Inputs
Required:
-
outline/outline.yml
-
papers/core_set.csv
Optional (if available):
-
queries.md (time window / exclusions context)
-
papers/papers_dedup.jsonl (if core_set is very small)
Outputs
- output/SNAPSHOT.md
Writing contract (paper-like, not generator-like)
-
Keep it to about 1 page (roughly <= 700-900 words).
-
Bullets-first: use short paragraphs only when unavoidable (<= 3 lines each).
-
No outline narration: avoid This section/subsection ... , In this snapshot ... , Next, we ... .
-
Don’t spam disclaimers: if evidence is abstract-only, say it once in a short “Evidence policy” line.
-
Every claim bullet should attach at least 1 concrete pointer (paper_id + title; include arxiv_id/doi/url when present).
Recommended structure (stable, minimal headings)
-
Title + scope (2-3 bullets)
-
Evidence policy (1 bullet)
-
Taxonomy (4-6 bullets; groupings only)
-
Key themes (6-10 bullets; each bullet = 1 claim + 1-2 pointers)
-
What to read first (6-12 bullets; canonical + recent; each bullet has pointers)
-
Open problems / risks (4-8 bullets)
Workflow
Read outline/outline.yml and extract:
-
the intended chapter structure (H2)
-
the 6-10 most “write-worthy” bullets per chapter
Read papers/core_set.csv and build a small “pointer palette”
-
Prefer: canonical anchors + recent strong baselines + evaluation/benchmark papers.
-
Avoid: dumping every paper; pick “must-read” sets.
-
If papers/core_set.csv is very small, also scan papers/papers_dedup.jsonl and cherry-pick a few missing anchors (keep pointers auditable).
Write output/SNAPSHOT.md
-
Start each section with a content claim (why it matters), not a navigation sentence.
-
Make at least 2 cross-paper contrasts (A vs B) to avoid a flat list.
-
Use consistent pointer formatting, e.g.:
-
P0012 - <Title> (arXiv:xxxx.xxxxx) or P0012 - <Title> (doi:...)
Definition of Done
-
output/SNAPSHOT.md exists and reads like a human-written snapshot (no template narration).
-
Includes >= 15 distinct paper pointers (or all papers if core_set < 15).
-
Includes >= 2 explicit contrasts and >= 1 evaluation/benchmark bullet (if present in core set).
Troubleshooting
Issue: snapshot feels empty / generic
Fix:
-
Increase papers/core_set.csv size (rerun retrieval/dedupe with broader queries.md ).
-
Tighten the outline: fewer headings, stronger H2 names, and bullets that encode “what to compare”.
Issue: snapshot reads like an outline narrator
Fix:
- Delete all “This section ...” openers and replace with: Claim -> why it matters -> pointers .